Bolt Rifles: Which do you prefer?

[ImperialTuba]

Not sure if this has been brought up, so apologies if I'm echoing a previous topic.

 

I came across the Bell of Lost Souls article on the updated Bolt Rifles a while back. 

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/08/warhammer-40k-battle-of-the-primaris-intercessor-bolters.html

 

It's great knowing that each rifle got attention and feels like it can serve a purpose. Personally, I was most happy to learn that Auto Bolt rifles went from Assault 2 to Assault 3. And looking back at the article today has me very tempted to give the Stalker Bolt rifles a try.  

 

I can't wait to use some of those stratagems in a game. They also got me rethinking how I group up my Intercessors in my lists. Normally, I don't exceed five-man squads, but spending the command points on five models doesn't seem very efficient. I'll probably have at least one 10-man squad going forward. It may have its drawbacks, but unleashing that Rapid Fire or Boltstorm stratagem just might be worth the risks.

 

So, how are the rest of you seeing these changes to Bolt Rifles? Do you have a new favorite? Do you think they're TOO powerful now? NOT POWERFUL ENOUGH?! Do you expect a nerf? A buff?! Should they change Auto Bolt rifles to Assault 6 AP -1 D3 Damage?!  

[Volt]

IMO Auto Bolters are better for walking fire to get into melee with intercessors, especially if you have veterans and slap something really dangerous on the sergeant.

[SkimaskMohawk]

From what I remember, the autobolt comes out on top every time vs the rifle, except when the rapid fire stratagem is used.

 

The stalker is a bit different, as the iron hands can use it far more effectively, while raven guard can use a squad to cripple character positioning (don't want to get a turn of character sniping, surgical striked stalkers hitting a bunch of characters).

[Volt]

From what I remember, the autobolt comes out on top every time vs the rifle, except when the rapid fire stratagem is used.

 

The stalker is a bit different, as the iron hands can use it far more effectively, while raven guard can use a squad to cripple character positioning (don't want to get a turn of character sniping, surgical striked stalkers hitting a bunch of characters).

Raven Guard benefit from just taking a full ten man squad with stalker bolters and using the devastator doctrine to full effect. Stick them in a building and rain hell on enemy characters - especially effective on horde armies like Guard or Tyranids where they depend upon characters to prevent their hordes from melting under morale losses.

[Panzer]

Well personally I prefer the Rapid fire variant because they make me want to be close to the enemy which is where I want to be with my Battleline anyway as Blood Angels player. I also like having standard weapons with AP-1 since it makes my guys feel more competent which is really want I want from an elite-ish army.

The Assault variant would kinda work too since you could advance and keep shooting, however there's no real need to since you get the most out of them by staying at 24" already anyway.

 

However currently mathhammer wise the Assault variant is definitely the strongest option. We'll see how long that'll last.

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

 

From what I remember, the autobolt comes out on top every time vs the rifle, except when the rapid fire stratagem is used.

 

The stalker is a bit different, as the iron hands can use it far more effectively, while raven guard can use a squad to cripple character positioning (don't want to get a turn of character sniping, surgical striked stalkers hitting a bunch of characters).

Raven Guard benefit from just taking a full ten man squad with stalker bolters and using the devastator doctrine to full effect. Stick them in a building and rain hell on enemy characters - especially effective on horde armies like Guard or Tyranids where they depend upon characters to prevent their hordes from melting under morale losses.

Except that the +1 to hit and wound is usually going to be stronger than the additional AP. I'm also assuming people won't just plop their characters in Los to get mega sniped either way.

[Mandragola]

The auto rifle is best, but it does have a cost - albeit not a huge one.

 

Bear in mind though that intercessors aren't necessarily there for their guns. They are screening things and sometimes fighting in melee too. So actually a 1 point increase for a slightly better gun isn't as good a deal as it might first seem, given that their guns kind of aren't the point.

 

Raven Guard stalkers are a slightly odd one. You want them doing target sighted, but you need them in tactical doctrine to do it, for your +1 to hit and wound.

 

I don't rate the auto bolt rifle stratagem, except maybe for some edge cases. You can spoil things for a Culexus assassin, for example, and harlequins won't appreciate it either. But the rapid fire and sniper strats both have very clear uses.

 

Personally I'm waiting to see what my Crimson Fists actually get for their rules. I can see myself really spamming intercessors if they're good. Right now I don't have any auto or stalker bolters built, but that's likely to change.

[ImperialTuba]

 

Bear in mind though that intercessors aren't necessarily there for their guns. They are screening things and sometimes fighting in melee too. So actually a 1 point increase for a slightly better gun isn't as good a deal as it might first seem, given that their guns kind of aren't the point.

 

 

 

Normally when my Intercessors are in close combat that's the sign that something has gone wrong. lol

 

I can only recall a handful of instances where I've had them charge, and it's normally to slow down a threatening target. I still like to think their shooting ability is very much their reason for being on the field.  

[Lemondish]

 

 

 

Bear in mind though that intercessors aren't necessarily there for their guns. They are screening things and sometimes fighting in melee too. So actually a 1 point increase for a slightly better gun isn't as good a deal as it might first seem, given that their guns kind of aren't the point.

 

 

Normally when my Intercessors are in close combat that's the sign that something has gone wrong. lol

 

I can only recall a handful of instances where I've had them charge, and it's normally to slow down a threatening target. I still like to think their shooting ability is very much their reason for being on the field.

3 attacks on the charge is worth using. It's basically a whole bunch of extra movement and is kind of the equivalent of another whole shooting phase with an ABR. You also get two chances to swing in combat for every shooting phase.

 

Intercessors are worth being aggressive with.

[ImperialTuba]

 

 

 

Bear in mind though that intercessors aren't necessarily there for their guns. They are screening things and sometimes fighting in melee too. So actually a 1 point increase for a slightly better gun isn't as good a deal as it might first seem, given that their guns kind of aren't the point.

 

Normally when my Intercessors are in close combat that's the sign that something has gone wrong. lol

 

I can only recall a handful of instances where I've had them charge, and it's normally to slow down a threatening target. I still like to think their shooting ability is very much their reason for being on the field.

3 attacks on the charge is worth using. It's basically a whole bunch of extra movement and is kind of the equivalent of another whole shooting phase with an ABR. You also get two chances to swing in combat for every shooting phase.

 

Intercessors are worth being aggressive with.

 

 

That's a good way to think about it. I've only played one game with the new Angels of Death rule, and it was against another SM player and without either of us having the supplements to our respective chapters. 

[Lemondish]

Give it a shot! I think it's powerful, but as with everything in this game there's really a time and a place. Perhaps walking them into Gman to be slaughtered isn't a good place after all ;)

[ShibeKing]

I prefer Stalkers and Autos. Stalkers for the range and Autos for the ability to keep moving around and keeping enemies away.

 

Probably should rethink Blood Angels since I prefer keeping my enemy at a distance. 

[Mandragola]

Yeah definitely. There are definitely things they can assault, but many things they want to be nowhere near!

 

My point is though, that if they're being slaughtered (e.g. by Bobby G) then it doesn't make any difference what gun they have. You may as well have saved your points.

 

And of course, it's great fun firing off 40 shots at 30" with the rapid fire strat. The ABR strat is lacklustre by comparison - though you could also argue it's good not to need a strat!

[Exilyth]

I haven't had much opportunity to try intercessors outside of killteam yet, but compared to tacticals, the 30" range (compared to 24" of normal bolters) and double tap of the normal bolt rifles is nice to have.

 

I could see a squad or two with stalker bolt rifles being useful for holding backfield/home objectives while still contributing to the fight.

[Silas7]

 

From what I remember, the autobolt comes out on top every time vs the rifle, except when the rapid fire stratagem is used.

The stalker is a bit different, as the iron hands can use it far more effectively, while raven guard can use a squad to cripple character positioning (don't want to get a turn of character sniping, surgical striked stalkers hitting a bunch of characters).

 

Raven Guard benefit from just taking a full ten man squad with stalker bolters and using the devastator doctrine to full effect. Stick them in a building and rain hell on enemy characters - especially effective on horde armies like Guard or Tyranids where they depend upon characters to prevent their hordes from melting under morale losses.

*Krieg laughter intensifies *

[Subtleknife]

For ultramarines I think the rapid fire variant is the best. Being able to move and rapid fire is very nice.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It's only a 6" difference with auto bolts, who still out-damage them

[Subtleknife]

It's only a 6" difference with auto bolts, who still out-damage them

According to mathammer 2 bolt rifle shots (simulating rapid fire) give the same damage as 3 auto shots when the enemy has t4 s3. Auto better marginally at t4 s4. Bolt rifle marginally better against t4 s2. Similar to t3. The bolt rifle then becomes much better at 4 shots simulating strat. But that is just math hammer. I prefer the extra few inches the bolt rifle gives. Plus the extra point per model would throw my list off too.

[Lemondish]

 

It's only a 6" difference with auto bolts, who still out-damage them

According to mathammer 2 bolt rifle shots (simulating rapid fire) give the same damage as 3 auto shots when the enemy has t4 s3. Auto better marginally at t4 s4. Bolt rifle marginally better against t4 s2. Similar to t3. The bolt rifle then becomes much better at 4 shots simulating strat. But that is just math hammer. I prefer the extra few inches the bolt rifle gives. Plus the extra point per model would throw my list off too.

I don't think you were taking into account the relevant doctrine there.

[Subtleknife]

I did I was going off the first turn. Second turn auto bolt is marginally better. But by that stage I will be in a position to keep firing out the 4 shot strat pushing the bolt rifle ahead again. I'm just talking about how I use my army since the title said which do you prefer.

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

It's only a 6" difference with auto bolts, who still out-damage them

According to mathammer 2 bolt rifle shots (simulating rapid fire) give the same damage as 3 auto shots when the enemy has t4 s3. Auto better marginally at t4 s4. Bolt rifle marginally better against t4 s2. Similar to t3. The bolt rifle then becomes much better at 4 shots simulating strat. But that is just math hammer. I prefer the extra few inches the bolt rifle gives. Plus the extra point per model would throw my list off too.

Well for shooting against geq (I assume, I don't know what the strength has to do with anything) your math seems off. Both at normal AP and doctrine-enhanced, the auto bolter does more damage.

 

The stratagem does indeed make the rifle better.

[Subtleknife]

 

 

It's only a 6" difference with auto bolts, who still out-damage them

According to mathammer 2 bolt rifle shots (simulating rapid fire) give the same damage as 3 auto shots when the enemy has t4 s3. Auto better marginally at t4 s4. Bolt rifle marginally better against t4 s2. Similar to t3. The bolt rifle then becomes much better at 4 shots simulating strat. But that is just math hammer. I prefer the extra few inches the bolt rifle gives. Plus the extra point per model would throw my list off too.

Well for shooting against geq (I assume, I don't know what the strength has to do with anything) your math seems off. Both at normal AP and doctrine-enhanced, the auto bolter does more damage.

 

The stratagem does indeed make the rifle better.

S is save not strength so the math is correct.

[Trevak Dal]

My first army was Tau, so compared to firewarriors Intecessors feel like vanguard veterans in combat.

 

I got a mixture of stuff. Two full squads with the rapid fire rifles, one with the assault rifles and one with the stalker rifles (well 9 guys not a full 10, I took some guys and I'm converting them into a chaplain and an apothecary)

[Exilyth]

The autoboltrifles would be more tempting if primaris had some sort of transport - then the (lack of) range would be less of an issue.

 

*stares at the impulsor datasheet, trying to will it into existence*

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I think it really depends on your chapter tactics and how you overall design your list. The stalker is better versus elite targets but still terrible versus horde. I see the bolt rifle as a happy medium.